MichiganTelephone
@85.195.x.x
| The Truth About Universal Service Fund
There was a post in Om Malik's blog about the Universal Service Fund that explains why there is a big push now to make cable and VoIP providers pay into it. Remember that in the past the "baby Bells" didn't have to pay into it because it was a surcharge on long distance calls, meaning companies like AT&T and MCI had to pay into it (of course, they passed the charge through to their customers). Well, you know who now owns AT&T and who is about to own MCI and suddenly they are looking for some other patsies to pay into this "corporate welfare" fund. As far as I am concerned the USF accomplishes little of value, and nothing that couldn't be accomplished much more fairly through other means of taxation, and make no mistake, the USF is a tax whether they call it one or not. Anyway you can read Om Malik's comments here:
The Truth About Universal Service Fund |
|
prestonlewis
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-13
Sacramento, CA
 ·VoiceStick
 ·Comcast
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
·DSL EXTREME
·Vonage
·VoicePulse
| Small population states are generally for the USF fee (because they benefit from it) and large population states are generally against it (because they pay the most into it). Like most (all?) government programs, USF is ripe with waste and mismanagement (Medicare too!) but it benefits small rural communities by helping to give incentives to increase telco/technology in those areas. I'm certainly no fan of the USF but I'd argue you need some kind of replacement plan for it before wanting to axe it.
Lastly, you make two mistakes that tarnish your message:
1. You wrote anonymously, using an unregistered tag. Regular forum members are often somewhat critical of such posts since they are often abused.
2. You use those dreaded words "The Truth" in your title which is often the buzz words of the religious right or the anti-government, anti-tax zealots of the far right wing of our society. It makes one wonder if you are part of one of those fringe groups.
I generally like Om Malik's posts but I did laugh at his quote of John Sununu who criticizes the USF. Sununu doesn't like ANY government interference in anything (except marriage, relationships, etc) and quoting him as being against the USF is like quoting a priest who supports the Pope. A balanced approach by Malik would have been to quote a Republican senator/congressman from a small population state who supports the USF. At least that would have balanced out his blog. |
|
